March 29, 2012

We were in the "backstage" area. Note how many people are on the other side, including on the roof. And way up over there:

I have some video too. I need to edit some high spots. The crowd was very responsive, even chanting "end the fed." No heckling. No indication that there were any fans of big government anywhere in the vicinity. Abolish the income tax... cheers! More than once, they booed Woodrow Wilson.

There is a HUGE built-in hatred of anyone who is a mainsteam Republican or Democrat. But often a third party candidate (which Paul basically is) can attract people who normally won't support that mainstream politician. Jesse Ventura rain for Governor of Minnesota as a libertarian-Republican. He probably did himself a huge favor when he yelled at the welfar lady to get a job instead of just leaving off the taxpayers.

If only Ron Paul weren't such a loon on foreign policy! He's the only candidate of any party who seems to have a clue on the real problems with the Fed, crony capitalism, excessive entitlements, and spending.

Cato Renasci: If only Ron Paul weren't such a loon on foreign policy."

Loon to you perhaps but a classic constitution-loving American who wants to close our foreign bases, bring home our troops, stay out of Israel's war with Iran, and quit threatening to bomb everyone. What's not to like?

Honestly put, if ugly. And exactly why Ron Paul and or his followers are indeed loons. Think we should stay out even when the next six million get incinerated? Gee, and whatever happened to all the "Never Again" b.s. these college kids got fed when the Holocaust was a hot topic in schools? Ho-hum. And all of them booing Woodrow Wilson. What (tiny) percentage of them do you think ever read a thing about Woodrow Wilson? Not my favorite president either, but booing him? Why not just another chant, like "hey, hey, ho, ho, the federal reserve has got to go" Or perhaps, "shame, shame, shame." Mindless.

One day earlier, on Tuesday, Paul spoke to a packed gym of 2000 at the U of MD. http://www.diamondbackonline.com/news/the-man-of-the-revolution-1.2831768#.T3WFGtnYHu8

One possibility (I think this is Althouse, but its not original with me) is that young people support Paul solely because he favors marijuana legalization.

But a second possibility is a lot of young people are really beginning to worry about the debt they inherit as they enter the work force. (Currently $120,000 + per household, and recently growing at $10,000+ per year per household).

For the first time in my life I can see a realistic scenario in which social security system dies: step 1. people (even those now in their fifties, and perhaps even those now in Social security) with paid for houses and retirement accounts large enough to pay for necessities will see social security payments reduced or eliminated by a means test. step 2. as social security is increasingly seen as welfare for those who have not saved for retirement, political support for the program erodes until the whole structure crumbles.

Do you really think Ron Paul, on the highly-unlikely chance he'd ever be elected, would abandon all of our defensive and diplomatic endeavors?

This isn't a monarchy. He can't just dissolve the Defense and State Departments. He can advocate for less involvement overseas, but he can't unilaterally close all overseas military bases and embassies.

A continued focus on establishment candidates who project power overseas while absolutely gutting our domestic condition could be construed as 'loony' as well.

Forget foreign policy. Until Ron Paul forcibly disassociates himself from the 9/11 Truther contingent and stops giving minutes to the idiot conspiracy peddling agitprop Alex Jones, I'm going to label him a "Loon" loud and clear to anyone and everyone.

It's a shame too, because I could get on board with his econmonic ideas. But he damages himself by not firmly refuting the lunatic fringe.

If he wants mainstream support, he needs to have his Sister Souljah Moment with the conspiritards. Until then, he gets nothing but negative marks in my book.

Before anyone starts ripping me for the above post, I need to be clear that I wasn't saying that Ron Paul is himself a truther. On the contrary, I'm fully aware that he's disavowed belief in that flavor of conspiracy paranoia. What I'm saying is that he needs to disassociate himself from those who do. Like Alex Jones. Until he rids himself of association with the loon fringe, he's not a viable candidate. Period.

> For the first time in my life I can see a realistic scenario in which social security system dies: step 1. people (even those now in their fifties, and perhaps even those now in Social security) with paid for houses and retirement accounts large enough to pay for necessities will see social security payments reduced or eliminated by a means test. step 2. as social security is increasingly seen as welfare for those who have not saved for retirement, political support for the program erodes until the whole structure crumbles.

Until about 15 years ago, Social Security advocates insisted that the linked contribution and benefits cap was essential. That cap meant that we didn't have to choose between giving Ross Perot $200k/year and seeing SS as old-folks welfare.

Ron Paul offers neatly wrapped solutions to the neatly wrapped problems created by liberalism. Of course he's popular! He goes too far, but so did the Left, and they are reaping this Paulian whirlwind.

At least this will get the students thinking in other paradigms than confiscate and spend.

I wish critics of his foreign policy would do more than just call him names. Instead, please explain why you think it's crazy to only go to war when it's declared by congress. Also, please cite statistics showing how many fewer terrorists there are in the world as a result our having spent over $15,000 per household on the Iraq war.

"I wish critics of his foreign policy would do more than just call him names."

Indeed, and why we are at it, why exactly again should we march into war with Iran when both the CIA and the Mossad agree that there is NO EVIDENCE that Iran is, or intends, to start a nuclear weapons program? Haven't we seen this movie once recently? Is it already time for a expensive, effect-laden, derivative sequel? Coming to the theater (of war) next term.

Why is it that the "loon" is the only presidential candidate from either party that can see it?